Cyclists who don’t wear helmets risk losing up to a quarter of any compensation if they are injured in an accident, Swindon and Marlborough-based law firm Withy King is warning.
With winter approaching and many cyclists now commuting to and from work in more challenging conditions, the firm is keen to highlight this important issue following a recent case.
Although it is not compulsory to wear a helmet, the judge in the case stated that any cyclist who chooses not to is potentially at ‘fault’ and runs the risk of being found to have contributed to their own injuries in the event of an accident caused by another party.
Withy King solicitor and keen cyclist Mark Hambleton, pictured, said: “This is significant because it raises the possibility that cyclists may have their personal injury compensation reduced by up to 25% if it can be shown that wearing a helmet would have prevented or reduced the severity of their injuries.
“It is unlikely that many people will be aware of this given that wearing a helmet is not actually mandatory. They may assume that blame will lie with the person responsible for causing the accident – not realising that they may have to accept an element of contributory negligence if they weren’t wearing a helmet at the time.
“There are various lobbies for and against wearing helmets and at present, cyclists are free to choose because the benefits of wearing a helmet have not been proven. However, they need to be aware that the judiciary believes cyclists should wear helmets so those who decide not to are taking a chance with their damages if they are injured.”
He said many cyclists decide not to wear a helmet and there is an argument that cyclists wearing a helmet are more likely to have an accident. It is believed that motorists assume these cyclists are well protected and drive less cautiously around them.
“The judiciary’s leaning towards contributory negligence raises an interesting question,” he added. “If a cyclist who is not wearing a helmet and a pedestrian were involved in the same accident caused by a motorist and suffered the same injuries, would the pedestrian be compensated in full and the cyclist only in part? Assuming a helmet would have reduced the cyclist’s injuries, there is a real chance this could happen but it would not create a fair result.”
According to RoSPA, 118 cyclists are killed and just under a further 19,000 injured on UK roads every year. This number is taken from reported accidents and it is believed those hurt in unreported accidents is likely to be two or three times higher. The most dangerous hours for cyclists are reportedly between 8am and 9am and 3pm and 6pm.
